As their time runs out, Republican candidates are making final efforts to campaign in Iowa before the caucus. The Iowa caucus is the first “contest” to determine who will be running against President Obama for the White House.
It appears that Romney, Paul, and Santorum are in the lead, although there are still many undecided voters on the fence about the election. Despite opposition to Romney in the 2008 election because of his inconsistencies and being Mormon, he currently leads the state with 25% of support.
While Jon Hunstman skipped Iowa completely to focus on campaigning in New Hampshire, an estimated $12.5 million has been spent on “largely negative” political advertising in Iowa from the other candidates. The next primary will be held in New Hampshire on 10 January.
6 comments:
Your "negative political advertising" remark made me remember one of the funniest parts about that. Who would ever have thought that Newt Gingrich would be the one to promote positive campaigning. It is just so unlike him. This is the guy that can't say anything except an insult or a highly negative remark saying that he intends to run a campaign without doing what he does best. It's remarkable in my opinion. Meanwhile, everyone is hammering him, especially Romney as of late, and he has done, well, not really anything to defend himself. I love politics.
Like Patrick, I also want to focus on your phrase "'largely negative' campaigning." I think it's so sad that our society and political culture have pushed people into being Negative Nellies. I know this is probably never going to happen, but I'd love to see people actually run for office positions based on their merits alone - a little meritocracy never hurt anyone.
That being said, I suppose it shows just how democratic our system really is. Competition has gotten so fierce that we now feel the need to cut others down rather than simply building ourselves up (competition being the key factor of democracy). I have to say though, I would gladly give up a little democracy for a little more equality and unity.
I agree with the last two comments that it is sad that our political culture involves mud-slinging and negative advertisement than the actual credentials of the candidates. The negative advertisements have hurt Newt Gingrich; the only candidate that promoted positive campaigning as mentioned by Patrick, is the perfect example of how people care more about the negative advertisements of candidates than anything else.
Today being the caucus, I just wanted to get in a word before the official results come through. Right now, I am laughing so hard inside because Santorum is at the same percentage as Mitt Romney. Compared to what Mitt Romney spent, Santorum spent nothing in Iowa and yet Santorum is still slightly ahead of Romney in the numbers. What does that say? Is Romney really that unlikable? I heard it be suggested by the reporters on MSNBC (I know they have a slight liberal bias, but I am hoping Rachel Maddow is keeping things more or less fair) that people may not have voted for him because of all the negative adds he has been doing about Gingrich. If this is true, then oh my god, I just agreed with Newt Gingrich about something. Positive campaigning seems to work (though apparently not for the person doing the positive campaigning).
Update: Santorum ahead by FOUR VOTES!!!!!!!!!!!! This is definitely one of the most exciting and closest results I have ever seen. It is incredible how Santorum literally came out of nowhere to just about win the Iowa caucus against a man who has spent huge sums of money to ensure his victory there, and he can't seem to win! Guess those evangelical voters really do make a huge difference in Iowa because wow. Oh, and Rick Perry suspending his campaign to reassess his campaign is also big. Personally, I think this is Rick Perry's way of saying "I'm done" just as Herman Cain did so many weeks ago. This is shaping up to be just as exciting as the 2008 election. Oh and for those of you who saw the speeches given by Romney and Santorum, which one do think is better because I think Santorum did a lot better in his.
It seems wrong that religion is playing such a big roll in the presidential election. Just because Romney is Mormon doesn't mean he doesn't share views with Catholics or Muslims or Buddhists. It kind of seems like there is separation of church and state only when it is convenient.
Post a Comment